Legal Opinion

Foley v. Hornung

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 14, 1917No. Civ. No. 1744PublishedCited by 5 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtChipman, P. J.

Plaintiffs are husband and wife, and the action is by plaintiff, Mary Foley, for injuries received by her through the alleged negligence of the defendant. It appears from the complaint that the defendant is a merchant conducting business in the city of Bakersfield in a building situated on Chester Avenue. It is alleged that the place of defendant’s business consisted of a building, on the ground floor of which his general merchandise business was conducted, and to which access was had at the entrance on Chester Avenue. That there was a basement to the building about nine feet below the ground…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Dixon v. PlunsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  2. McDonnell v. Pescadero & San Mateo Stage Co.California Supreme Court · 1898
  3. Hunt v. ElliottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  4. Weinburg v. SompsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Coffer v. BradshawCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1932
  2. American Nat. Bank v. WolfeCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1938
  3. Spore v. WashingtonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
  4. Brown v. PepperdineCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
  5. Chronakis v. WindsorCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1993

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API